The proposed garage, a 24×40 feet structure with an average height of less than 15 feet, is designed to store tools, household items, and no more than three personal vehicles. The applicant sought a C1 hardship variance due to the combined front and rear yard setback requirements totaling the depth of the property, essentially preventing construction without approval. In addition, Berardo sought approval for the variances related to the maximum area allowed for a private garage and pre-existing non-conformities such as lot area, even after the lot consolidation.

During the presentation, the engineer representing Berardo highlighted the positive aspects of the proposal, including the improved aesthetics compared to the deteriorated building being demolished, support from neighbors, and a reduced environmental load by eliminating the need for separate septic or well systems. The negative criteria were addressed with the assertion that there would be no substantial detriment to the zoning plan or adjacent structures.

The board engineer’s concerns about the amount of impervious coverage due to two driveways were discussed. The applicant agreed to reduce the paving in front of the garage and eliminate the second driveway to accommodate these concerns. This change ensures compliance with the board’s recommendations and addresses potential water drainage issues.

Questions from the board touched on the intended use of the garage, the consolidation of lots, and specific details about the structure’s setbacks. The applicant also confirmed the willingness to submit revised plans to reflect the changes discussed regarding driveway and paving adjustments.

Following the discussion, a motion was made and seconded to open the floor to public comments.

The meeting also included the acknowledgment of a closed session discussion regarding a settlement agreement related to zoning litigation with a company, the details of which were not disclosed in the open session.